Gara Battery Energy Storage System

Destruction of Protected Nature Reserves will be the result if this terrible, extreme FIRE BOMB BESS plan is Approved as conservation areas including Gara Dam, Yina, and Imbota Reserves are close by.

Habitat pollution and toxic Lithium-ion BESS fires would seriously and irreversibly degrade biodiversity, including threatened woodland species with their ecological value destroyed and impossible to restore due to the highly toxic chemicals and Bis-FASI PFAS poisoning the land and water forever.

ACEnergy’s GARA BESS plan threatens local water ecosystems as it is in very close proximity to vital water sources - sitting near Burying Ground Creek (500m), Gara River (2.5 km), and Commissioners Waters (3.5 km).

Chemical runoff risk is highly likely, with serious detrimental impacts - not properly considered in the biased EIS.

FIRE suppression, groundwater contamination and structural failure will all introduce toxins into aquatic environments.

GARA BESS is an ecosystem and human health hazard: downstream water users, agriculture, wildlife, and habitats would all become critically endangered if this dreadful GARA BESS is irresponsibly approved and unethically constructed.

GARA BESS plan violates the Paris Agreement
Article 2 1(b) breach: the Paris Agreement mandates development that does not threaten food production—this project directly conflicts with that obligation.

GARA BESS is misaligned sustainability - it sacrifices agricultural outputs to build intermittent storage and fails climate-resilient sustainable development.

There is International inconsistency as the GARA BESS plan is acting counter to global agreements and damages Australia’s credibility and environmental leadership.

ACEnergy’s horrible GARA BESS plan is a public health and safety disaster that would contaminate food chains and pose broader risks to community health and trust.

There are obvious Food Safety & Livestock Risks that are not addressed at all in the EIS, nor by the irresponsible Department or complicit IPCN in all their fudged Approval processes.

Hazardous chemicals and Bis-FASI PFAS contaminating battery toxins will contaminate this grazing area, compromising meat/milk safety and human/animal health.

LPA certification is put in jeopardy by toxic
RUIN-A-BULLS with contamination breaching standards like the Livestock Production Assurance Program, threatening producer market access.

This GARA BESS curse will cause irreversible damage to essential, Agricultural Land and vital Water sources.

Toxic Lithium-ion BESS DO NOT belong anywhere near 423 ha of productive RU1 farmland!
ACEnergy’s obnoxious BESS would take this land & the surrounding district out of food production forever when it’s highly toxic residue & Bis-FASI PFAS contaminants poison the area.

Instead of being ‘clean and sustainable’ as falsely claimed ACEnergy’s hazardous plan would cause extensive and irrevocable loss of ecosystem services: soil fertility, carbon sequestration, and habitat functions.

This plan defies the Paris Agreement as it THREATENS FOOD SECURITY - damaging regional capacity to produce essential food, causing long-term economic and social impacts.

Where are the massive water requirements needed on site to deal with the inevitable, highly toxic, ongoing BESS FIRES as the amount stated is totally inadequate.

Enormous water demand is required when extinguishing a Li‑ion battery fire of this size as they burn for days and reignite.

Rural Fire services lack such volume—especially in drought-prone areas like around Armidale.

Irreversible, land and water contamination - poisoning waterways - local dams, creeks and rivers will occur from burnt BESS residue and toxic smoke - threatening human lives, stock, wildlife and biodiversity.

There are overwhelming incidents with widespread
lithium-ion Battery🔥FIRES - which caused more than 1,000 fires in Australia in just the past year.

Lithium-ion Battery🔥Fires are high-grade chemistry hazards as flammable NMC and Lipo chemistries exacerbate FIRE🔥 likelihood.

Emergency services are ill equipped and strained by out of control lithium-ion Battery🔥FIRES which demand extensive resources, jeopardising rural communities’ resilience and safety.

Where is ACEnergy’s OWN ESSENTIAL FIRE🔥FIGHTING SERVICE and ACEnergy’s OWN FIRE TRUCK, FIRE-FIGHTING STAFF and HAZMAT EQUIPMENT LOCATED ON SITE as we don’t consent to our taxes being wasted on untrustworthy off-shore predators like ACEnergy with such dangerous, poisonous plans that are highly likely to kill local Australians.

There is a life threatening Fire Extinguisher Certification Gap regarding this highly toxic, FIRE Hazardous Lithium-Ion Gara Battery plan of irresponsible ACEnergy’s.

CSIRO won't certify any extinguisher effective against Li‑ion fires.

NO Australian Standard exists for extinguishing Li‑ion battery fires.

With this regulatory vacuum - are they actually, deliberately trying to kill us with these Fake Green, POISONOUS BESS MONSTROSITIES that no one in their right mind consents to having forced on their community!!

The increased, toxic fire risk from careless BESS experiments and untested, ineffective equipment leaves communities vulnerable, especially near residential or agricultural areas.

Thermal runaway is extremely disastrous as damaged or improperly charged batteries can swell, ignite, explode, and emit toxic, flammable vapors.

Even after suppression, fires reignite hours or days later.

This large-scale BESS FIRE HAZARD will produce overwhelming toxic smoke and environmental contamination when it inevitably burns!

Please refer to the attached documents for details of my submission objecting to the proposed development Gara Battery Energy Storage System, Application No SSD-71680710.

Gara BESS is an extremely toxic, horrific FIRE plan that will burn for days - billowing smoke over local families, stock and wildlife.

*There is no cost effective recycling & dumping toxic BESS junk in landfill will cause irreversible environmental & public harm.

*Chemical leaching risk: landfill disposal of bis‑FASI‑laden waste causes soil and groundwater contamination.

*Australia recycles only ~10% of battery waste; the rest reaches landfills!!

*Long-term costs: cleanup and remediation are impossible - causing toxic contaminated wasteland with the toxic residue implications borne by communities and taxpayers as there is deliberately NO DECOMMISSIONING and REHABILITATION BOND mentioned by totally dodgy, irresponsible and untrustworthy ACEnergy.

ACEnergy’s POISONOUS GARA BESS BOMB IS THE ASBESTOS OF THE FUTURE!!

*Persistent "Forever Chemicals" Contamination will result.

*Long-term environmental persistence: bis‑FASI (a toxic subclass of PFAS in Li‑ion batteries) persist in soil and water indefinitely.

*There are harmful PUBLIC HEALTH & SAFETY RISKS at extremely low exposure: just one drop in an Olympic‑size pool can damage animal nervous systems.

*Agriculture - FOOD SAFETY and WATER SECURITY will be threatened by this toxic, life threatening GARA BESS: contamination of RU1 farmland, groundwater, and ecosystems—irreversible damage to crop and livestock health, food safety, and local biodiversity.

Please find the body of my formal objection to the proposed Gara BESS development and supplementary information supporting my submission attached.

Please find my objection, domestic town water easement and comprehensive mitigation plan as presented April 2nd, 2025, at the community meeting by ACEnergy showing 10-metre-wide native vegetation proposed planting and acoustic wall barriers originally indicated to be much more substantial, all attached.

Please refer to the attached documents for details of my objection to the proposed development.
Note Gara BESS landscape concept plan as presented at community meeting April 2nd 2025. shows wide band of native screen planting on common eastern boundary with R1 and R3 that was presented to affected residents as a comprehensive mitigation plan.

The project is inconsistent with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Dale and Leanne Simmons
‘Landsbree’
891 Waterfall Way
Armidale NSW 2350
0413711723 (Leanne)
Resident R6

Project: Gara Battery Energy Storage System – SSD-71680710
86 Woodlands Rd, Armidale NSW 2350

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed Gara BESS development. My family has owned and operated our property since 1997. It is both our primary place of residence and the foundation of our livelihood as primary producers, focusing on cattle breeding and fattening, supported by hay production and pasture improvement.

Grounds for Objection
1. Severe Impact on Quality of Life and Mental Health
The core reason we chose to live in this location was to enjoy a natural rural lifestyle, peace, quiet, clean skies, and freedom from industrial disruption. This proposal undermines the very purpose of our move here. The industrial-scale noise, light, and visual intrusion from the facility will permanently destroy our quality of life, replacing the tranquillity of nature with constant mechanical disturbance and artificial light.
The psychological toll of living beside an industrial facility of this scale should not be underestimated. A recent NSW parliamentary inquiry into the Central-West Orana Renewable Energy Zone documented significant mental health impacts on rural landholders exposed to similar developments, including heightened stress, anxiety, and social division. This proposal will cause the same pressures on residents here, leaving long-term consequences for wellbeing, family stability, and community cohesion.

2. Loss of Tourism and Future Opportunities
We had planned to diversify our property through eco-tourism, establishing a campground along our creek to take advantage of the spectacular rural views. Such plans will now be impossible. Campers come to enjoy nature, dark skies, and quiet. Instead, their experience would be dominated by the sight of an industrial facility, constant noise, and intrusive lighting. This project therefore not only robs us of our future opportunities but also undermines the broader tourism potential of the district.

3. Property Value and Amenity
The project will drastically reduce the value and saleability of our property. The dwelling we designed was built specifically to capture the views that are now directly overshadowed by the BESS site, which is located at the same topography as our house. Several neighbours have already listed their properties due to the proposal, and we may be forced to do the same. Should the project proceed, residents directly impacted by its visual, noise, and environmental impacts must be offered the option of selling to the proponent at fair market value.

4. Health, Noise, Dust, and Light Pollution
Noise, dust, and light pollution are unavoidable consequences of both the construction and ongoing operation of large-scale BESS facilities. These impacts will compromise daily life, agricultural productivity, and tourism opportunities on our property.
Independent studies and industry reports confirm that BESS cooling systems and inverters generate sustained noise levels of 70–92 dB at close range comparable to the constant hum of a vacuum cleaner or garbage truck. Such continuous mechanical noise will severely disrupt residents, disturb livestock, and make our property unsuitable for eco-tourism and camping, which rely on peace and quiet.
The construction process will also generate significant dust, reducing the quality of pastures, contaminating hay during harvesting, and negatively affecting the health of cattle. For residents, this will create unpleasant and unhealthy living conditions.
Finally, the facility’s artificial lighting at night will irreversibly alter the rural character of the landscape. Research confirms that light pollution impacts human wellbeing by disrupting sleep and increasing stress, while also interfering with wildlife and natural ecological rhythms. For a property built to capture natural views and a community that values dark skies, this intrusion is unacceptable.

5. Fire Safety and Risk Management Concerns
The risks of fire and explosion in large-scale BESS facilities are not hypothetical but well documented. In 2021, the Victorian Big Battery near Geelong experienced a major fire caused by a coolant leak that led to a short circuit and thermal runaway, spreading between Tesla Megapack units. This was confirmed by Energy Safe Victoria and independent investigators.
Furthermore, reports such as the AGL Liddell BESS Fire Safety Study (2024) highlight that understanding of fire behaviour in industrial-scale batteries remains limited, with evolving technologies and regulations still being refined. NSW’s own planning system requires Fire Safety Studies under HIPAP and Fire & Rescue NSW guidelines, as seen in the Smithfield BESS project, while the CFA in Victoria mandates such studies for all BESS facilities over 1 MWh.
Given these systemic uncertainties, rural emergency services are not adequately resourced to manage large-scale lithium battery fires, which can burn for days and release toxic gases. Locating such a facility adjacent to family homes and farms is unacceptable.

6. Contamination Risk and Environmental Impact
Large-scale BESS failures are known to release toxic chemicals through fire suppression runoff or battery leakage. In our case, contaminants would have direct access to the creek system running through our property, threatening water quality, cattle health, hay production, biodiversity, and downstream users. This facility is located uphill from our primary water source for both domestic and stock use. This risk is incompatible with the area’s role as a centre for primary production and tourism.

7. Incompatibility with Rural Character and Planning Objectives
This development is inconsistent with the rural identity of our area. Our region is defined by farming, open space, and growing tourism potential. The proposed BESS represents an industrial intrusion incompatible with both local character and the NSW Government’s own strategic planning objectives, which emphasise sustainable development and community wellbeing.

Conclusion
This development fundamentally undermines our right to live safely, peacefully, and productively on our land. It destroys the quality of life we invested in when moving here, removes the possibility of developing a campground business, endangers our creek system, and devalues our property beyond recovery.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Department to refuse the Gara BESS proposal. Should it proceed, residents directly affected by its impacts must be provided the option of selling their properties to the proponent at fair market value.

Thank you for considering this objection.
Dale and Leanne Simmons
0413711723

We, Dale and Leanne Simmons, of ‘Landsbree’ 891 Waterfall Way Armidale NSW 2350, declare that we do not have any reportable political donations within the last two years. We also acknowledge the department's disclaimer and declaration policies.

Please accept this submission as my formal objection to Gara BESS

The transition to renewable energy requires unprecedented development across NSW. The planning and delivery of many generation projects in Renewable Energy Zones and the required interconnecting transmission projects in the grid across NSW are collectively ALL currently required to meet targets and to successfully deliver both the NSW Electricity Infrastructure Roadmap and to successfully contribute towards delivering the Nations Integrated System Plan as designed by AEMO.

The fact that the entire Scope and Scale of (a) each REZ and (b) for the full NSW REZ and Transmission plan has not been presented to the NSW Public, in my mind, is neither fair or just. Assessing each project individually, is taking advantage of the current dated and flawed NSW planning system and fails to present the transition transparently and with adequate due-diligence and accountability for impacts, particularly cumulative impacts to the State and to the people, lands and water of NSW.

As a resident of rural NSW, I am concerned that the planning process for this type and scale of transition is not protecting NSW Agriculture, rural communities and the future of rural and regional NSW and Australia.

I liken this type of assessment for Australia’s first Renewable Energy Zones and associated transmission infrastructure to building a Nation-first Hospital but presenting only one room or ward at a time for assessment.

Across the vast rural areas of NSW collectively, there is and will be, a mostly unknown permanent change to landscapes and rural community character, a significant interruption to and reduction of farmland and food and fibre production, a permanent change to rural tourism products, the destruction of community cohesion and the introduction of a multitude and magnitude of new electricity generation and associated transmission infrastructure – these are all critical and fundamental reasons that this transition needs to be presented to the people of NSW holistically, not in part and 1 project at a time.

Residents within a REZ have never been presented with what a REZ fully entails. The EPA Act requires public exhibition of certain development proposals, allowing rural communities to provide input on projects that may alter their landscapes or way of life. This ensures community voices are considered in decisions affecting rural areas. Presenting each project within a REZ and projects required for bringing this generation to the grid one by one, pushes on the boundaries of project fragmentation or project splitting, which the EPA Act explicitly tries to prevent. It is the responsibility of the NSW Government to recognise this.

The NSW Government is committed to delivering the NSW Electricity Roadmap and is significantly funding EnergyCO as the Infrastructure planner for each REZ, a REZ cannot deliver what is required by the State without the culmination of generation, storage, firming and transmission projects. Assessing each project one by one is pulling the wool over the eyes of every NSW resident and taking advantage of legislation written before a REZ concept was even thought of.

It appears to me, that the NSW Land and Environment Court has played a critical role in preventing project splitting. Courts have ruled that assessing components of a larger project in isolation may breach the EPA Act’s requirement for comprehensive environmental assessment. Eg. In Mach Energy Australia Pty Ltd v Minister for Planning (2019) NSWLEC 55, the court emphasised the need to consider the full scope of a project’s impacts, including related infrastructure.

I firmly object to the approval of this project until such time as the entire NSW REZ rollout, associated/required generation, storage, firming and transmission projects are transparently presented to the public of NSW for their full consideration and participation.

I object to the Gara BESS project

I object to this project

I am against every aspect of this project